| The essential legitimacy of the content of academic opinions and the possibility of limiting judges' discretion and enhancing the acceptability of judicial documents through such opinions are the fundaments of citing academic opinions in judicial documents. They are also the starting points of the establishment of rules of citation. According to their influence, academic opinions can be divided into general opinions, prevailing opinions and minority opinions. Judges have the discretion on whether to cite a general opinion or a non-general opinion. Citing of non-general opinions should be encouraged as the main trend. When citing academic opinions in judicial documents, it is advisable that judges adopt a dialogue technique, avoid long paragraph copying and pasting of general opinions, and cite different genres of representative works to demonstrate quantity advantage as far as possible. Scholars' names have the functions of identifying and assuring the quality, goodwill and judicial rhetoric of the academic opinions and the source of academic opinions have the function of showing the development process of the academic opinions of scholars. Therefore, citing a scholar's academic opinions should indicate the scholar's name and the source of the opinions. In essence, citing academic opinions in judicial documents are judges' “purchase” of academic products, which will stimulate scholars to actively produce academic products to meet the demand of practice, thus promote a positive interaction between the academic and the practical circles. The Supreme People's Court may consider formulating certain guidelines on the citation of academic opinions in judicial documents. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号